Date:	Mon, 30 Jul 2001 18:19:49 +0300 (IDT)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	Andrew Cottrell <acottrel AT ihug DOT com DOT au>
cc:	sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: Make 3.791 on Windows 2000 test
In-Reply-To:	<003501c118f1$2b6467f0$0a02a8c0@acceleron>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1010730181203.16014C-100000@is>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Andrew Cottrell wrote:

> Instead of modifying allot of the GCC files to include the crt0 startup flag
> I hacked crt1.c so that what ever I built GCC (except redir) it would
> include the unixy sbrk. After building GCC I thought I would re-build make
> from the ground up for regression testing with the latest LIBC and the
> regression testing did not find any changes compared to the previous build
> that I had not allready seen.
> 
> The crash still occured in gcc1.exe, even with the re-built GCC and make.

So do I understand correctly that Make, either rebuilt with the Unixy 
sbrk flag set in its main function, or linked with hacked up crt1.c which 
makes Unixy sbrk the default, does not crash?  And that cc1.exe, even 
after rebuilding it, still crashes with the same traceback which shows 
address wrap-around?

> What next?  Any other tests or suggestions?

I'm guessing that somehow the Unixy sbrk flag is not being set in 
cc1.exe.  To see if this is so, please run the rebuilt cc1.exe under GDB, 
put a breakpoint on the function called `start' (that's the entry point 
to every DJGPP program), and when the breakpoint breaks, please print the 
value of __crt0_startup_flags and see if the Unixy sbrk bit is set.

Also, please make sure that the cc1.exe binary which gets run and crashes 
when you try to rebuild Make is the same binary you built with the 
hacked up version of crt1.c.  (Sorry for asking the obvious ;-)

> Should I now try to get RHIDE to
> rebuild and then test it on Win2000 and wait to see if RHIDE shows different
> symptoms or different issues?

I'd suggest to stay with GCC for now.  Adding RHIDE to the equation would 
force us deal with too many unknowns.

- Raw text -